Importance of Diet and Lifestyle on Gut Bacteria as We AgeAugust 1, 2012
Infant growth and development begins in the womb and continues at a rapid pace during the first months and years of life. Breastfeeding provides optimal nutrition for this development, especially when the mother’s nutrition itself is optimal. The fat content of breast milk is of great importance to infant development—especially when it comes to the omega-3 fatty acid DHA, and the omega-6 fatty acid metabolite arachadonic acid (AA) which are both concentrated in the infant brain during the last trimester and first few months of life.1
As research of the gut microbiota continues, we are learning more about how our gut bacterial balance may affect our health—and we are also learning that there is still a lot that we don’t know! A recent study published in the journal Nature made some good strides towards our understanding of the gut microbiota in the elderly.1 The researchers determined the fecal bacterial composition in 178 elderly people (average age 78). They also looked at dietary intake, and measured a range of physiological and psychological factors and inflammatory markers to find any associations to the gut microbiota.
The participants were separated into four groups based on location: community-dwellers, attendants of an out-patient day hospital, those in short-term rehabilitation hospital care, and those in long-term residential care. They also included 13 young adults, average age 36. What they found was a greater diversity of bacteria in the community-dwelling group when compared to the long-term residential care group. Also, the variation in gut bacteria between individuals was greater in younger adults compared to older adults. So, as we age, gut bacterial diversity decreases overall.
The gut microbiota composition was found to depend on where the individual lived and what he or she ate. Those with the most diverse diet (a high-fiber, low-fat diet) were found to have the most diverse gut bacteria. Those individuals who ate a diet low in fiber and either high or moderate in fat were found to have the least gut diversity. The researchers suggest that diet was the underlying factor that contributed to a change in microbiota that, in turn, contributed to the health of the individual.
“Our findings indicate that any two given older people, independent of starting health status and genetic makeup, could experience very different rates of health loss upon aging due to dietary choices that impact on their gut bacterial ecosystem,” stated Paul O’Toole, lead author. “You can think of [diet] as another controllable environmental factor that we can act upon to promote healthier aging.”
Markers of inflammation (serum TNF-alpha, IL-6, IL-8, and C-reactive protein) were found to be higher in the long-stay and rehabilitation groups than in community dwellers. And loss of the bacteria associated with community-dwellers was linked to increased frailty. The study concluded, “Collectively, the data support a relationship between diet, microbiota and health status, and indicate a role for diet-driven microbiota alterations in varying rates of health decline upon aging.”
More studies will certainly be needed to continue to elucidate the intricacies of the gut microbiota and its far-reaching health effects. However, this study made some interesting connections that build on previous findings that support a decrease in gut bacterial types and diversity as we age, contributes to poor health.
Dr. Elie Metchnikoff (from a 104 years ago) would be pleased to know we are finally proving what he believed: Probiotic bacteria obtained from eating and drinking fermented yogurt and milk, maybe a major anti-aging technology, as is the increase in diversity of the commensal bacteria which is supported by prebiotics, probiotics, diet, and lifestyle.2
References
1.M.HJ. Claesson, et al., “Gut microbiota composition correlates with diet and health in the elderly.” Nature. 2012 July 13;ePub.
2.E. Metchnikoff, The Prolongation of Life, Knickerbocker Press, 1908.
Leonard Smith, M.D.**********************************************
Omega-6 to Omega-3 Ratio of Breast MilkJuly 18, 2012
Infant growth and development begins in the womb and continues at a rapid pace during the first months and years of life. Breastfeeding provides optimal nutrition for this development, especially when the mother’s nutrition itself is optimal. The fat content of breast milk is of great importance to infant development—especially when it comes to the omega-3 fatty acid DHA, and the omega-6 fatty acid metabolite arachadonic acid (AA) which are both concentrated in the infant brain during the last trimester and first few months of life.1
The main polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) found in breast milk are AA and its precursor, linolenic acid (LA), the parent essential omega-6 fatty acid. DHA is found in lower concentrations, but is considered to be a particularly important component of breast milk. The fat content of breast milk varies greatly, however, depending on the diet of the mother. There is considerable debate as to what fatty acid compositions are considered optimal.
In women consuming a Westernized, Standard American Diet (SAD), dietary intake of DHA, and levels of DHA in breast milk, are lower than in mothers eating traditional, hunter-gatherer diets. The omega-6 to omega-3 ratio of the SAD diet is between 10:1 to 25:12,3 (that’s 10 to 25 times more omega-6 than omega-3), whereas the ratio of a hunter-gatherer diet it more like 1:1 to 2:1.4 It can be difficult to achieve hunter-gatherer omega-6/omega-3 status, however, so many experts agree that anywhere from 1:1 to 4:1 is optimal.
In a recent study published in the journal Maternal & Child Nutrition, researchers stated, “Currently, infant formulas are modeled on breast milk compositions of US women, despite high inter-population variability in milk PUFA composition, and the high [omega-6]/low omega-3 PUFA in US milks. It has been suggested, therefore, that standards for formula and milk fatty acid composition should derive from populations consuming non-industrialized diets.”
The researchers evaluated the fatty acid content of breast milk in mothers from Ohio consuming a typical SAD diet, and compared it to that of indigenous Tsimane mothers from the Amazon rainforest in Bolivia consuming a diet that more closely resembles human ancestors—that is, they live off the land.5
“The Tsimane mothers’ average milk DHA percentage was 400 percent higher than that of the Cincinnati mothers, while their average percentages of linoleic and trans fatty acids were 84 percent and 260 percent lower, respectively,” stated Melanie Martin, the lead researcher. “Despite living in economically impoverished conditions, Tsimane mothers produce breast milk that has more balanced and potentially beneficial fatty acid composition as compared to milk from U.S. mothers.”
High amounts of DHA in breast milk mean that the mother herself has high amounts of DHA in her body, which is stored there after eating DHA-containing omega-3s. As it turns out, DHA is beneficial for both mother and babe. Lower DHA content in breast milk and lower seafood consumption have been linked to higher rates of postpartum depression.6 In addition, maternal supplementation with DHA and EPA (the other main omega-3 fatty acid found in fish oil) during pregnancy and breastfeeding has been associated with higher IQ in the children at four years of age.1 And high amounts of DHA in breast milk have also been associated with improved vision in infants.7 These benefits make perfect sense because DHA is found in highest concentration in the brain and retina of the eye.
Since the SAD diet is so far off the ideal omega-6 to omega-3 ratio, most, if not all, people would do well to supplement with omega-3 fish oil—especially DHA during pregnancy and lactation. Optimizing the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio is possibly the single most important thing people can do to support overall health.
References
1.I.B. Helland, et al., “Maternal supplementation with very-long-chain n-3 fatty acids during pregnancy and lactation augments children’s IQ at 4 years of age.” Pediatrics. 2003 Jan;111(1):e39-44.
2.P.M. Kris-Etherton, et al., “Polyunsaturated fatty acids in the food chain in the United States.” Am J Clin Nutr. 2000 Jan;71(1 Suppl):179S–88S.
3.A.P. Simopoulos, “Omega-3 fatty acids in health and disease and in growth and development.” Am J Clin Nutr. 1991 Sep;54(3):438–63.
4.A.P. Simopoulos, “The importance of the ratio of omega-6/omega-3 essential fatty acids.” Biomed Pharmacother. 2002 Oct;56(8):365–79.
5.M.A. Martin, et al., “Fatty acid composition in the mature milk of Bolivian forager-horticulturalists: controlled comparisons with a US sample.” Matern Child Nutr. 2012 Jul;8(3):404-418.
6.J.R. Hibeln, et al., “Seafood consumption, the DHA content of mothers’ milk and prevalence rates of postpartum depression: a cross-national, ecological analysis.” J Affect Disord. 2002 May;69(1-3):15-29.
7.M.H. Jorgensen, et al., “Is there a relation between docosahexaenoic acid concentration in mothers’ milk and visual development in term infants?” J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2001 Mar;32(3):293-6.
Leonard Smith, M.D.**********************************************
Gut Microbes - They Digest What You Can'tJuly 04, 2012
Over the course of a lifetime 60 tons of food pass through the digestive tract.1 Carbohydrates, fats, and proteins—the macronutrients—are broken down into smaller parts—sugars, fatty acids, and amino acids—with the help of digestive secretions, like hydrochloric acid (HCl), and digestive enzymes. In an average healthy individual, about 85 percent of carbohydrates, 66 to 95 percent of proteins, and all fats are absorbed before digestive contents enter the large intestine.2 Yet, the non-digestible carbohydrates and proteins make up between 10 and 30 percent of total energy absorbed from the digestive tract. How is this possible?
The gut bacteria make it possible. In the large intestine, gut microbes ferment starch, sugars, fibers, and mucins into short-chain fatty acids and gases. Multiple factors affect how much and which SCFAs and gases are produced. These factors include age, diet, gut microbial composition, pH of the colon, and gut transit time (how long it takes food to travel through the digestive tract—in constipated people gut transit time is longer).
Carbohydrates are particularly important nutrients when it comes to gut microbes because carbs provide nutrients to the host (that’s you) and to the gut microbes. Non-digestible carbohydrates (otherwise known as fiber) are delivered to the colon and fermented by microbes. The SCFAs produced during this process—mainly acetate, propionate, and butyrate—are used to fuel intestinal cells (butyrate), are transported to the liver for energy production or cholesterol synthesis (propionate and acetate), or remain available in the blood as an energy source (acetate).2
Short-chain fatty acids make up about 6 to 10 percent of total energy absorbed from the diet. While this may not seem like much, the amount of energy absorbed from the colon, and how that energy is used, is an active area of research that is uncovering the effects of the gut microbiota on metabolic conditions such as obesity and insulin resistance. I’ve blogged about this gut connection to childhood obesity.
In yet another recent gut microbe study published in the PLoS One journal, researchers investigated the carbohydrate degradation activity of the microbiome throughout the body and concluded, “Digestion in the gut appears highly specialized for the digestion of carbohydrates.”3
It may seem obvious that gut bacteria are specialized to break down carbohydrates, but one interesting finding of the study was the ability of oral bacteria to produce, “a hitherto underestimated large range of enzymes to initiate plant polysaccharide breakdown as indicated by the presence of cellulases, hemicellulases, and pectin hydrolases.” It was previously thought that carbohydrate-digesting enzymes found in the mouth were secreted in saliva. Now we know our bacteria, even in the mouth, play an important role in digestion beginning in the mouth.
We are only beginning to scratch the surface of what can be known about the human microbiome, but one thing is for sure: We are a super-organism living in harmony (or disharmony in the case of poor health) with our inhabitants (our microbes). It is truly a humbling learning experience to know we are not as in control as we once thought.
References
1.S. Bengmark, “Ecological control of the gastrointestinal tract. The role of probiotic flora.” Gut. 1998 January; 42(1): 2–7.
2.R. Krajmalnik-Brown, et al., “Effects of gut microbes on nutrient absorption and energy regulation.” Nutr Clin Pract. 2012;27:201–214.
3.B.L. Cantarel, et al., “Complex carbohydrate utilization by the healthy human microbiome.” PLoS ONE. 2012;7(6):e28742.
References
1.The Human Microbiome Consortium, “Structure, function and diversity of the healthy human microbiome.” Nature. 2012 June 14;486:207–214.
2.K Li, et al., “Analyses of the Microbial Diversity across the Human Microbiome.” PLoS One. 2012 June;7(6):e32118.
Leonard Smith, M.D.**********************************************
The Human Microbiomone ProjectJune 20, 2012
The Human Microbiome Project is a five-year research collaboration between 200 scientists at 80 universities and scientific institutions, all funded with $153 million by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) with the aim of, “characterizing the microbial communities found at several different sites on the human body, including nasal passages, oral cavities, skin, gastrointestinal tract, and urogenital tract, and to analyze the role of these microbes in human health and disease.”
The project began in 2007 and has just been “completed,” with the publication of 14 scientific papers in medical journals this past week. By completed, I mean that the discoveries made by this group, although immense in scope due to the amount of data garnered, only begin to scratch the surface of what we know about the human microbiome and how it functions in relation to health and disease.
The findings of this latest research, which I will begin to summarize here, set the foundation for what will be a fascinating quest, through research and yet more discovery, of the depths of complexity that is our microbiome. As Dr. Barnett Kramer, director of the division of cancer prevention at the National Cancer Institute stated, “we may just serve as packaging” for our microbiome. Our microbes are truly in control.
The Human Microbiome Project sampled up to 18 different body sites from five different areas of the body—airways, skin, oral cavity, digestive tract, and vagina—in 242 healthy humans aged 18 to 40 years.1 Traditionally, microbes have been identified using culture-based methods, a process that requires organisms to remain alive in the laboratory, thus greatly limiting the wide range of microbial species identified. Instead, the researchers utilized relatively new DNA sequencing techniques to identify the full array of bacteria present. They say they have identified between 81 and 99 percent of all microbial genera in healthy Western adults.
The microbial communities were found to be remarkably diverse. Not only did the diversity differ substantially from body site to body site, it also differed greatly from person to person. The greatest similarities between people were seen in those with similar ethnic/racial backgrounds, and, interestingly, in the saliva of people living in the same communities.2 Also, the greatest diversity was found in the oral cavity, and the least diversity was found in the vagina (thought to be due to the tight regulation of vaginal conditions required for health).
Not only did the researchers study microbial composition, but they also examined functional status of the microbes based on the protein coding of the microbial DNA. As it turns out, our bacteria contribute far more genes responsible for human survival than do our own DNA—360 times more, to be exact. “Humans don’t have all the enzymes we need to digest our own diet,” said Lita Proctor, PhD, Human Microbiome Project program manager at the National Human Genome Research Institute. “Microbes in the gut break down many of the proteins, lipids, and carbohydrates in our diet into nutrients that we can then absorb. Moreover, the microbes produce beneficial compounds, like vitamins and anti-inflammatories that our genome cannot produce.”
As it turns out, the greatest similarities were found regarding these functions of the microbes. That is, certain functions are always needed in certain areas of the body, like carbohydrate digestion in the gut, but different microbes can perform these same functions. “It appears that bacteria can pinch hit for each other,” said Curtis Huttenhower, Ph.D., of Harvard School of Public Health and lead co-author for one of the papers in the journal Nature. “It matters whether the metabolic function is present, not which microbial species provides it.”
The studies also looked at certain conditions under which microbial communities change, such as after antibiotic therapy, just before birth, or in children with fevers. These initial studies are only the beginning. “Enabling disease-specific studies is the whole point of the Human Microbiome Project,” said Barbara Methé, PhD, of the J Craig Venter Institute, Rockville, MD, and lead co-author of the Nature paper on the framework for current and future human microbiome research. “Now that we understand what the normal human microbiome looks like, we should be able to understand how changes in the microbiome are associated with, or even cause, illnesses.”
Kudos to these tenacious scientists for their groundbreaking work that will serve as a stepping stone to the discovery of a whole new universe—the microbiome: changing the face of medicine as we know it. I look forward to the ride.
References
1.The Human Microbiome Consortium, “Structure, function and diversity of the healthy human microbiome.” Nature. 2012 June 14;486:207–214.
2.K Li, et al., “Analyses of the Microbial Diversity across the Human Microbiome.” PLoS One. 2012 June;7(6):e32118.
Leonard Smith, M.D.**********************************************
Gut Bacteria Suggested to be Responsible for Obesity in Children Born by CesareanJune 06, 2012
In the United States, the cesarean birth rate rose from 20.7 percent in 1996 to 32 percent in 2007.1 The increase is thought to be due to the increase in maternal request of cesarean birth2—that is, the request by the pregnant women without medical necessity.
In a recent study published in Archives of Diseases in Childhood involving over 1200 children born to women between 1999 and 2002, those children born by cesarean were found to have higher BMI (body mass index, a measure of obesity) and higher subcutaneous body fat at age 3 when compared to those children born vaginally.3 Cesarean delivery has previously been found to be a risk factor for the development of childhood asthma and allergies. Brenda recently blogged about the connection between cesarean delivery and asthma.
The researchers suggested that, “the composition of intestinal microbiota acquired at birth among cesarean and vaginally delivered newborns may contribute to their risk of obesity by age 3.” Studies have found differences in the intestinal bacteria of cesarean born versus vaginally born children.4,5 Most studies have found that infants born by cesarean have higher amounts of the Firmicutes bacteria, and lower amounts of Bacteroidetes.3
This same gut microbial profile—higher Firmicutes and lower Bacteroidetes—has been found in obese individuals, as well.6 Further, studies have found that weight loss is associated with a lowering of Firmicutes levels and/or an increase of Bacteroidetes.6,7 Other studies have found that children who were overweight at ages 7–10 had lower amounts of bifidobacteria during infancy.8,9 Bifidobacteria are abundant in the intestines of healthy infants, and persist in a healthy digestive tract until after middle age.10
Two reasons for the change in intestinal microbiota seen in infants delivered by C-section include the addition of antibiotics during cesarean to reduce chances of infection, and the fact that the infants do not pass through the microbe-rich vagina, missing out on the inoculation of healthy bacteria from the mother. These are likely explanations for the difference in bacterial composition that we see may even lead to the development of obesity later in life.
Cesarean delivery is sometimes medically necessary; there is no doubt about that. But opting for cesarean birth when it is not medically necessary may not be the best option for supporting optimal health in the infant. In any case, I think it is a good idea for all mothers to take pre- and probiotics during pregnancy, and while breast feeding (especially after a C-section). Furthermore, adding probiotics to expressed breast milk or formula will ensure the baby has a chance to develop a healthy, balanced microbiome. A healthy microbiome leads to a healthy balanced immune system, and balanced immunity may prevent type 1 autoimmune diabetes, asthma, obesity, and other autoimmune conditions of childhood, and their life-long effects.
References
1.F. Menacker and B.E. Hamilton, “Recent trends in cesarean delivery in the United States.” NCHS Data Brief. 2010 Mar;(35):1–8.
2.NIH State-of-the-Science Conference Statemnt on cesarean delivery on maternal rewuest. NIH Consens State Sci Statements. 2006;23:1–29.
3.S.Y. Huh, et al., “Delivery by caesarean section and risk of obesity in preschool age children: a prospective cohort study.” Arch Dis Child. 2012 May 23. [Epub ahead of print]
4.M.M. Gronlund, et al., “Fecal microflora in healthy infants born by different methods of delivery: permanent changes in intestinal flora after cesarean delivery.” J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 1999 Jan;28(1):19–25.
5.S. Salminen, et al., “Influence of mode of delivery on gut microbiota composition in seven year old children.” Gut. 2004 Sep;53(9):1388–9.
6.R.E. Ley, et al., “Microbial ecology: human gut microbes associated with obesity.” Nature. 2006 Dec 21;444(7122):1022–3.
7.I. Nadal, et al., “Shifts in clostridia, bacteroides and immunoglobulin-coating fecal bacteria associated with weight loss in obese adolescents.” Int J Obes (Lond). 2009 Jul;33(7):758–67.
8.M. Kalliomaki, et al., “Early differences in fecal microbiota composition in children may predict overweight.” Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Mar;87(3):534–8.
9.R. Luoto, et al., “Initial dietary and microbiological environments deviate in normal-weight compared to overweight children at 10 years of age.” J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2011 Jan;52(1):90-5.
10.T. Mitsuoka, “Bifidobacteria and their role in human health.” J Indus Microbiol Biotech. 1990;6(4):263–7.
Leonard Smith, M.D.**********************************************
Low Omega-3 Equals Smaller Brain and Less MemoryMay 23, 2012
A recent study published in the February 2012 issue of Neurology is now actually showing that people with a diet lacking in omega-3 fatty acids have lower brain volume and reduced brain function.1 We have known for some time that taking a fish oil supplement is good for your brain but now we are seeing that a lack of these fatty acids could actually cause brain dysfunction.
Using the participants of the Framingham Study, researchers recorded the red blood cell levels of DHA and EPA (omega-3 fatty acids) in 1,575 dementia-free people. MRI brain scans and cognitive evaluation that included a Logical Memory test, abstract reasoning skills, and attention and executive function abilities were also performed. Those participants with DHA levels in the bottom 25 percent were found to have the smallest brain volumes and scored the lowest in cognitive functions such as visual memory, executive function, and abstract thinking. Those participants with the highest levels of DHA within their red blood cells also had the largest brain volumes and the highest cognitive function. But that’s not all. Those with the highest DHA levels also had a 37 percent lower risk of Alzheimer disease and a 47 percent lower risk of all-cause dementia. That’s pretty substantial.
As well, the MRI findings in the lower brain volume participants represent a change equivalent to approximately 2 years of structural brain aging. So if you have low omega-3 DHA levels in your blood, expect that your brain is actually two years older than you are.
We know that higher dietary intake of omega-3 fatty acids in the form of fish oil supplements increases the amount of DHA omega-3 in red blood cells. Red blood cell membrane omega-3 levels represent averaged levels over the past 120 days.2 Levels of red blood cell DHA in the top quartile (the highest levels) may result in higher brain volume and improved cognitive function. This likely occurs by two main pathways: vascular and nonvascular.
Vascular Benefits: Higher omega-3 levels improve the vasculature by reducing blood pressure, lowering risk of blood clots, reducing inflammation, and lowering blood triglyceride levels. Vascular risk factors, including cerebral atherosclerosis, have been associated with increased risk of dementia, as stated in the Neurology paper.
Nonvascular benefits of omega-3s, particularly DHA, are likely to occur in the brain, in which DHA is concentrated include: Decrease in beta amyloid plaques, increase in brain derived neurotropic Factor (BDNF), synaptic protection with decreased free radicals and inflammation, and decrease in exitotoxic omega-6 arachidonic acid. The smaller brain volumes and greater white matter hyperintensity volumes found in people with lower DHA levels suggest DHA plays a major nonvascular role.
About two-thirds of brain matter is composed of fats. And the type of fats you eat will make a difference on your thought processes, mood and behavior, and memory. If you eat nothing but saturated fat, expect that to go to your head as well. Make sure you take 1,000 mg of omega-3 supplement daily, and if anyone calls you a “fathead,” thank them and move on.
References
1.Z.S. Tan, et al., “Red blood cell omega-3 fatty acid levels and markers of accelerated brain aging.” Neurology. 2012 Feb 28;78(9):658–64.
2.L. Arab, “Biomarkers of fat and fatty acid intake.” J Nutr. 2003 Mar;133 Suppl 3:925S–932S.
Leonard Smith, M.D.**********************************************
Fish Oil And Your GumsMay 09, 2012
A recent review of studies presented at the Experimental Biology 2012 meeting in San Diego, CA evaluated whether fish oil supplementation could be a beneficial additional therapy for periodontitis, or gum disease. Researchers from Australia reviewed eight human studies and found improvements in clinical measures in all studies, but the two studies that used a combination of fish oil with aspirin found most benefit. More studies are needed to determine if fish oil plus aspirin is more beneficial than fish oil alone.
In one study, 900 milligrams of EPA+DHA and 81 milligrams of aspirin daily was added to a scaling and root planning procedure, and was found to improve probing depths and attachment at 3 and 6 months when compared to only the scaling and root planning procedure.2 Another study adding fish oil and aspirin to decalcified freeze-dried bone allograft found similar improvements in patients with gum disease.3
Fish oil alone may also be sufficient. One study evaluated dietary intake of EPA and DHA and found that low intake of DHA was associated with more periodontal disease events in elderly patients.4 Brenda also blogged last year about another study that found fish oil beneficial for gum disease.
Lead researcher of the review, Dr. Alison Coates stated, “I would recommend that people ensure they have a sufficient intake of long chain omega-3 fatty acids in their diet for general health. In Australia, these types of fatty acids are considered to be essential with about 500 milligrams recommended as the suggested dietary target.” Recommendations by the American Heart Association (AHA) are similar. AHA recommends the consumption of at least two fatty fish meals per week, which is the equivalent of about 500 milligrams of EPA+DHA fish oil daily. AHA also recommends 1 gram (1000 milligrams) of EPA+DHA daily for people with coronary heart disease, and 2–4 grams daily for people with high triglycerides.
The connection between heart disease and periodontal disease illustrates why omega-3 fish oil may also benefit periodontal disease. Both are inflammatory conditions, and omega-3s have anti-inflammatory effects in the body. It could also be that the omega-3s help to maintain tight connections between the gums and teeth (like the tight connections between intestinal lining cells). Thus, a good tooth-gum connection may prevent “leaky gum syndrome,” and block bacteria from creating pockets between the gum and tooth, which underlies the process of periodontitis. When periodontitis occurs, bacteria seed the blood, and can go to the coronary arteries, and create heart attacks even in people without heart disease! I often open fish oil capsules, rub the oil on the gums, and then floss to be sure the tissues get direct oil contact, as well as systemic benefits, of the omega-3 oils.
As you can see, the wide-reaching effects of omega-3 fatty acids—especially the EPA and DHA found in fish oil—are truly astounding. These studies are yet one more example of fish oils wide reaching effects.
References
1.Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB). “Fish oil could be therapy for periodontal disease.” ScienceDaily, 24 Apr. 2012.
2.H. El-Sharkawy, et al., “Adjunctive treatment of chronic periodontitis with daily dietary supplementation with omega-3 Fatty acids and low-dose aspirin.” J Periodontol. 2010 Nov;81(11):1635-43.
3.A.M. Elkhouli, “The efficacy of host response modulation therapy (omega-3 plus low-dose aspirin) as an adjunctive treatment of chronic periodontitis (clinical and biochemical study).” J Periodontal Res. 2011 Apr;46(2):261-8.
4.M. Iwasaki, et al., “Longitudinal relationship between dietary ω-3 fatty acids and periodontal disease.” Nutrition. 2010 Nov-Dec;26(11-12):1105-9.
References
1.D.A. Hill, et al., “Commensal bacteria-derived signals regulate basophil hematopoiesis and allergic inflammation.” Nature Med. 2012 Mar 25; EPub ahead of print.
Leonard Smith, M.D.**********************************************
Gut Bacteria And AllergiesApril 25, 2012
Gut health is the foundation upon which total-body health is built. That is the message Brenda and I have been promoting since the beginning. Over the years, scientific support of this message has grown substantially, especially with regard to the effect of gut bacteria on many aspects of health.
A new study published in the journal Nature Medicine has further elucidated the mechanism of allergy development in antibiotic treated individuals. Previous studies have found links between the development of allergic disease and alteration in gut bacterial composition. In fact, I recently blogged about one such study.
In the new study, mice were given antibiotics to deliberately alter their gut microbiota composition. This resulted in a decrease in beneficial bacteria with an associated increase in blood and lymph node levels of allergen-activating white blood cells known as basophils, and immunoglobulin E, or IgE. IgE binds to basophil surface receptors. This event liberates histamine and inflammatory cytokines from the basophil cells which are capable of triggering powerful allergic responses. The combination of basophils and IgE, or IgE alone, recognizes allergens, such as dust mites, pollen, or certain foods, and signals the immune system to produce inflammatory cells. The result: allergic reactions.
The study found that these increased levels of IgE were found along with increases in basophils (immune cells involved in allergic response) and allergic inflammation. Mice that retained their gut bacteria were protected against these allergic alterations, highlighting the crucial role gut bacteria play in immune regulation.
Studies like these further our understanding of the gut link to health conditions, and they serve to identify possible pathways by which we may one day be able to prevent or treat these conditions. Lead researcher David Artis, PhD stated, “It may be beneficial to identify the specific commensals [or gut bacteria] and commensal-derived signals that regulate circulating basophil populations as this could lead to the development of new probiotic or other commensal-derived therapies.”
Did you think your gut could hold so much power over your health? Now, what are you going to do to support you gut health?
I would suggest prebiotics and probiotics, some cultured foods, and an 80 percent plant-based diet (high in soluble and insoluble fiber), which is the main support for a healthy microbiome (new name for our 100 trillion gut bacteria).
It will be wonderful to see the horrific problems associated with allergy and inflammation diminish as humanity learns to care for their microbiome with probiotics and wise food choices.
References
1.D.A. Hill, et al., “Commensal bacteria-derived signals regulate basophil hematopoiesis and allergic inflammation.” Nature Med. 2012 Mar 25; EPub ahead of print.
Leonard Smith, M.D.**********************************************
Mineral Toxins and Autoimmunity - What Can We Do?April 11, 2012
A recent article from the Journal of Environment International showed a significant connection between elevated blood mercury levels and autoimmune antibodies to parts of the thyroid gland, specifically thyroglobulin.1 Thyroglobulin is a protein made in the thyroid gland that is essential for the production of thyroid hormones. With mercury in the thyroid gland, antibodies develop and attach to thyroglobulin, producing complexed thyroglobulin-antibodies (TgAb), which prevent normal function—hypothyroidism is the result.
However, the story goes way beyond just the thyroid gland. Thyroglobulin autoantibody (TgAb) elevations in the blood have been associated with not only autoimmune thyroiditis, but also rheumatoid arthritis, pernicious anemia, fibromyalgia, and diabetes. Furthermore, one of the papers referenced in the article showed that removal of mercury-containing dental amalgams (silver fillings) resulted in a lowering of the thyroid autoantibody blood levels, and improvement of thyroid function. Other diseases implicated in elevated levels of toxic minerals (including mercury, lead, arsenic, cadmium, aluminum, and more) include neurologic inflammatory conditions such as autism, multiple sclerosis, and most neurodegenerative conditions. So what can we do about the problem of exposure to toxic minerals like mercury?
First, it is important to determine your exposure to these toxins. If you live near coal-burning power plants or industries that use mercury, if you eat large fish (especially tuna and swordfish) regularly, and if you have mercury-containing dental amalgams, most likely you will have elevated hair, blood, and tissue levels of mercury and other toxic minerals. Measurement of these toxins in hair and in packed red blood cells represents chronic exposure (3–4 months), and is more meaningful than serum and urine levels that generally represent exposure over a few days. If you wish to know about total-body storage of toxic minerals, chelating agents (such as DMSA, DMPS, and EDTA) can be used to bind the toxins and deliver them to the urine where they can be easily measured. It can be shocking to find out how much these agents can pull toxic minerals (like a magnet) from your tissues.
Second, it would be wise to find a physician trained in detoxification and chelation to help slowly remove these toxic minerals while monitoring your kidney and liver function, as well as your overall condition. Removing these toxins too fast can trigger many symptoms ranging from fatigue to rashes. Onset of symptoms does not mean you need to abandon the treatments, but to slow down, and do more things to support your liver, kidneys, and natural detoxification mechanisms. So what can you do before even testing or removing toxic minerals with the help of a doctor? It is simple—everything we have been discussing over the years, including:
Eat an 80 to 90 percent plant-based organic diet, with organic, free-range animal products.
•Avoid most all simple carbs and sugars to give you optimum energy and metabolism needed for detoxification.
•Keep hydrated: Drink 2 to 3 quarts or more of water daily. (Add lemon and stevia to make lemonade if water is unappealing.)
•Good bowel elimination daily: If toxicity levels are high, you may need to supplement with magnesium and/or herbs to promote bowel elimination.
•High quality sleep 7 to 8 hours per night: If needed, take sleeps aids like melatonin, GABA, or 5-HTP
•Probiotics & cultured food: Our intestinal microbiome and high-fiber diet maybe our best detoxification mechanism.
•Vitamin D3 and fish oil are needed to manage inflammation which can affect the body’s mineral balance and enzyme pathways needed for detoxification.
•Take a multiple vitamin, mineral, antioxidant supplement.
•Other supportive detoxification supplements include selenium, zinc, CoQ10, lipoic acid, N-acetyl cysteine, glutamine, glycine, and milk thistle.
•Regular use of infrared sauna increases your removal of toxins through the skin which is a major detox organ. Many people who do not sweat easily develop the ability to do so with sauna use. It’s good to exercise your sweat glands!
•Exercise regularly: Aerobic, resistance training, and stretching are all needed for optimum circulation in and out of tissues, and minimizing fat (which majorly stores toxins).
There is more, but this would be a good start not only for natural removal of toxic minerals, but to optimize the quality of your life in general.
References
1.C.M. Gallagher and J.R. Meliker, “Mercury and thyroid autoantibodies in U.S. women, NHANES 2007-2008.” Environ Int. 2012 Apr;40:39-43.
Leonard Smith, M.D.
866-599-6300